Libraries and Access

A talk delivered at CFP '95
by Karen Coyle, University of California, Library Automation
Libraries are entirely about universal access, and have been for at least 150 years
since the beginning of the free public library system.

Access to electronic resources has the potential to greatly expand the scope
of libraries to materials beyond their own physical collections. This is particularly
important for small and rural libraries with limited collections. We now have
what the library world calls the "library without walls."

But electronic information also has the potential to be detrimental to universal
access.

Nature of ownership of information changes

The free lending library is a product of the print world. Libraries purchase materials; and
because of our copyright laws and the "first sale doctrine", libraries are free to lend the physical
materials without limitation. The limitation is only on the
copying of materials.

In the electronic age, rather than owning a "unit" of information (book, journal,article),
the library typically leases access to information. The use of leased information
is governed not by copyright law, but by the contract with the individual information
provider.

This endangers the ability of the library to provide free access when electronic
information is leased on a "per use" basis. A well-functioning public library
lends the equivalent of two times its entire collection each year. Now imagine
if the library purchased each use, rather than each book or report.

Even if the cost of individual materials should be less in the electronic
future, it means that libraries no longer have fixed budgets, but pay based
on the amount of access, something they can't predict at the beginning of a
fiscal year. This makes it very hard for a public institution that is strapped
for funds.

Where charges for access to particular materials are high, libraries may need
to pass specific costs on to the patron, thus limiting that access to those
who can pay - and that is not universal access.

The delivery mechanism for information changes

Electronic information is delivered to a computer in the library, not to the person. Except for
isolated quick factoid, most library users want their information "to go." As soon as computers
and CD-ROM workstations arrived in libraries, users insisted
on the ability to print what they saw on the screen.

How should we deliver electronic information to the library user?

We could let users print. This is all right for short or rarely requested
items, but it is prohibitively expensive and time consuming for 300+ page
government documents, and totally inefficient for high-demand items. The printed,
mass produced book is unequaled as a technology to deliver lengthy texts to
a wide audience. It doesn't make sense to return printing to a cottage industry,
taking place in libraries and homes.

On diskette? The whole point is that libraries will serve the users to don't
have other access to the technology, so they can't make use of a diskette.

In-Library use? This is actually proposed by some as a solution. It is a
myth that poor people have ample time to spend in the library. Working poor
have least time of anyone.

The Archival Function of the Library

Libraries are our archive of past and current intellectual output. Once information
is released to the public by being stored in libraries, it becomes part of this
archive. Our large libraries (university, research and state libraries, as well
as the Library of Congress) specifically see their mission to retain copies
of everything that has been published. This effort is coordinated through nation-wide
databases so that libraries share the burden of archiving the "last copy."

In the age of "contract information", it is the publisher or information provider
who retains the data: libraries are only temporary stations through which individual
units pass going from the provider to the library user, and libraries do not/cannot
retain a copy. So they can't perform the archiving function.

I'm not comfortable relying on the publishers to perform the archiving of
their information: it is a costly and quite unprofitable activity. We lost much
of our early film heritage because the producers of films did not archive their
own works.

"Freedom to Read" or the anti-censorship function

Once an item is published and purchased by a library, it is in the hands of
an institution that believes fervently in the public's freedom to read.
Libraries fight censorship attempts by their communities, by their governing
boards and by their users.

They also believe that patron privacy is necessary for intellectual freedom.
The American Library Association considers patron records, the lists of what
books a person has checked out, to be absolutely private. ALA instructs librarians
who receive law enforcement (even FBI) requests for patron records to refuse
to turn them over unless presented with a proper court order.

Will electronic information providers be as staunch in their defense of the
First Amendment? This is doubtful. The library is the only institution that
provides a full range information on a non-profit basis. The pressure to eliminate
"controversial" resources from an information service could well result in censorship
of a whole range of unpopular ideas if retaining these information resources
threaten the profitability for an information provider. If libraries don't own
the materials, they can't take the responsibility to fight the forces behind
censorship.

What's needed?

Recognize the function of "commons of knowledge" that has been provided by libraries and
understand its social value. By obtaining copies of works, libraries have limited the power of
other interests, whether commercial or social, to censor, limit or destroy works; they have been
an archive of centuries of human intellecutal activity, and at the same time have achieved
universal public access.

Develop copyright laws that reward the author while allowing the greatest possible
dissemination of works.

We must not allow discrimination in the sale and delivery of information
on the part of providers. Providers should not be able to deny their information
to those who might be critical of it, yet we have already seen examples of
this.

Coda

I remind you that the library provides not only access to information, but
also access to the library. Summer reading programs; literacy classes; a place
for people to go that is public, quiet and supportive; community meeting rooms;
story hours for children; after school programs; and, most importantly, a safe
place to ask a question.

Whatever we do in the future,
whatever technologies we employ,
whether libraries are physical or virtual,we must continue to provide that safe place.